Posted By:
Judge Dred (Fred)First and foremost these third party grading services should be concerned with identifying FAKES/REPRINTS and ALTERED cards.
They seem to do a decent job about detecting FAKES/REPRINTS. It appears that the services could do a better job of detecting alterations.
I believe that these grading services should indicate that the card is AUTHENTIC and then give a grading range to the card. If the card is what they feel is NRMT then give it a "7"-"9" window. If someone wants to pay a huge price for the card then they are willing to accept the fact that the range is "7"-"9". This would reduce the incidents of resubmissions. It will also make the buyer take a very close look at what they are purchasing and then they can't (completely) blindly rely on the grading service.
Cards that are in the lower end can have a "1"-"2" range. The same principles apply. If the card is that bad then the buyer can decide how bad is bad.
If the card is altered then the label should indicate ALTERED and the nature of the alteration.
Now, deciding what is an alteration may be interesting because everybody can't seem to agree. It's democracy at its best.
ISO 900x certifications cost a bit of money. A lot of those certifications rely heavily on documentation (how it's tracked, modified, etc.). Those certifications are not cheap. Are collectors willing to absorb the extra costs that grading services are going to rack up by maintaining that certification? I suppose one could create their own certification group but then another could/would pop up and the next thing you know we have the WBA, WBC, WBF, WWF - you get the picure....